Queen of England Enemy of Al Qaeda
Posted on November 13, 2005
AL-QAEDA has threatened the Queen by naming her as “one of the severest enemies of Islam” in a video message to justify the July bombings in London.
The warning has been passed by MI5 to the Queen’s protection team after it obtained the unexpurgated version of a video issued by Al-Qaeda after the 7/7 attacks. Parts of it were broadcast on Al-Jazeera, the Arabic satellite channel.In the video, Ayman al- Zawahiri, second-in-command to Osama Bin Laden, targets the Queen as ultimately responsible for Britain’s “crusader laws” and denounces her as an enemy of Muslims.
A senior Whitehall official said: “MI5 is aware that there are some pieces of that video that have not been aired. They are aware of the bit of al- Zawahiri talking about the Queen and they have notified the relevant authorities.”
The Sunday Times has obtained the full 27-minute video, which is circulating on secure jihadist websites in the Middle East used to recruit and inflame prospective terrorists. In Britain it has been posted by Muhammad al-Massari, the London-based Saudi extremist, on his website Tajdeed.
In the video al-Zawahiri not only labels the Queen as one of Islam’s “severest enemies” but also sends a warning shot to British Islamic leaders who “work for the pleasure of Elizabeth, the head of the Church of England”.
He said those who followed her were saying: “We are British citizens, subject to Britain’s crusader laws, and we are proud of our submission . . . to Elizabeth, head of the Church of England.”
The propaganda continues in this global war of religion. Britain, we stand by you. The Crusades? Give me a break! Didn’t those end like a couple hundred years ago?
More at In the Bullpen
Euphoric Reality
» Filed Under News, War On Terror
Trackback URL
Comments
4 Responses to “Queen of England Enemy of Al Qaeda”
Affiliations
The Giants
-
Donate
Suggestions
Our Store
Click the design to visit our store and help Stop the ACLU!
More blogs about the ACLU
The Crusades occured between the 11th and 13th centuries. that would be 1300 years ago! Not to mention the Muslims were the agressors not the Christians. The Crusades were a RESPONSE to the expanding and ruthless Islamic Empire.
Then there is the concept of Dhimmi:
As much as I hate the current Islam-o-nutcases, this is absolutely, patently NOT TRUE:
“The Crusades were a RESPONSE to the expanding and ruthless Islamic Empire.”
There is just no need for this kind of mis-information. It just clouds the real issues, and gives the enemy moral high ground, at least in their own perverted minds.
I say stick with the facts, which are potent enough.
V/R
To SangerM:
The Crusades *were* in fact a response to over 300 years of Moslem agression. A simple examination of the history of the Roman and Byzantine empires will show that most of what we now call the “Middle East” was, before Mohammed, Christian territory. This includes Turkey (with Constantinople as the Christian capital of the Eastern Roman empire), Syria, Israel, Egypt, Libya, Tunisia (if memory serves St. Augustine was a Bishop in Tunisia), Algeria and Morocco.
How did all these countries get to be Moslem? Was it a spontaneous conversion? Indeed not–they were all invaded by Moslems.
The Crusaders responded to an appeal from the ruler of Byzantium (the former Eastern Roman Empire) to help against this aggression.
Say what you will about the Crusades, they were not started by Christendom.
I don’t believe I ever said such a thing.